All right, let's go. Welcome to the zoning board of appeals. Please silence all cell phones and note that this meeting is being taped by FCTV. If there's any private party recording this hearing, please step up to the podium and request permission.
>> I'll introduce the board and staff. On my far right is on time, Mr. Mark Finan. >> To his left is Scott Peterson. And to my right, we have Frank, >> Frank Duffy, the clerk. I'm Suzanne Murphy, the chair. To my left is James Moore, vice chair. Then we have Tony
Patuchian, associate and Nick Hanny, associate. Norin Stockman, zoning administrator, and Ashley Dlo, office assistant. The zoning board of appeals is charged with applying the state zoning statutes as well as the town zoning bylaws in reviewing and voting on
applications. All decision decisions are made through the public hearing process. Our goal is to hear testimony from the applicants and the public and to allow a full and fair discussion of the project prior to closing the hearing process and reaching a decision. Number one, to begin each hearing, the clerk will read
the public announcement for the hearing and read pertinent information from the file. Two, the applicant or the applicant's representative will then have 15 minutes to make a presentation, but time may be extended by vote of the board. Three, the board will then question the applicant. Four. The public
will then be invited to comment. Comment should be limited to two minutes and be strictly related to the proposal. All members of the public wishing to speak should wait to be recognized by the chair and should come to the podium. State your name and address for the record and speak into the mic and it will not amplify your voice and record
audio for FCTV viewers. But before we start any hearings, there's a a time where you can come up to the podium if anyone has public comment. But with nothing on our agenda, everybody all set. So, as at a request, we're going to take
07925 494 Tommy B. Landers Road first. >> That's all right with everyone up here. I didn't ask Mark. >> Ask me what I was busy eating my trees. >> You got You got the right one first,
Frank. >> Yeah. You ready? >> Yep. >> Yes. Okay, the first one is application number 79 of the year 2025. Seth Adams um is the representative and Katamut
Sawmill Realy LLC is the owner of properties have applied to the Falma zoning board of appeals for a special permit pursuant to section 246.3B of the Falmouth zoning bylaw to construct a new 42x 88 storage building on the property. The property is located
at 494 Thomas B. Landers Road, East Balmouth. The zoning district is light industrial A. The overlay district is the West Balmouth Harbor Coast overlay district. Current use is a sawmill with
accessory structures. The ex existing structures total 29,538 square feet. There is a previous or there are several previous uh zoning board of appeals decisions with respect to this property, but the most recently recent one was in
the year 2022 and it was for uh an 8 bay contractor building. The lot size is 7.4 acres which is actually 323,546 ft. The minimum lot size in the district is 40,000 square feet. So they got
plenty of land. Street frontage 316 ft. The requirement is 150 ft. Thomas B. Landers Road is a public right of way. Lot coverage by structure is currently 9.1%. It would be increased by this requested
building to 10.3%. The limit is 40%. Lot coverage by structure parking and paving is currently 20.4%. It would be increased to 21.9%. The zoning bylaw provides a limit of 70%. There are no noted nonconformities
on the property. The proposed building is 23 feet 8 in. We have references from engineering who ask us to consider storm water runoff and erosion and sediment control. The board of health uh we didn't hear from him. Conservation has
no comment. The water department noted that there is no water service uh to this proposed building and a new service may be required. We don't know whether that's whether it is or not. Building department had no comment. The planning board has informed us that they have
given a site approval on October 21, 2025 with conditions. And as far as letters in the file, we have none noted either in opposition or support. >> For the record, uh my name is Seth Adams.
Um Thomas Reality Trust. Um, as uh Mr. Duffy mentioned, I was last here in front of the board for this structure right here, 8 bay contractor bay building, which we
permitted and then constructed. Um, and we are back um in front of the board to build or for uh hopeful permission to build this building. Um, as uh Mr. Duffy mentioned 300 3,962
I mean 3,692 square ft um 42 by 88 4 bay um storage building. Um, two overhead doors
here facing Thomas Landers. Uh, at the grade of Thomas Landers, not kind of down at the lower elevation that the previous 8 bay building was permitted. And two, um, overhead doors uh, here um,
facing towards our um, yard. Um they'll be used for wood storage in the back here and we've designed and have gone through with the planning board and hope for permission here for potential rental of these two
bay. Um as noted in um the um dialogue um we are not planning a water service here. They are strictly um storage bays so heat and electricity only.
Um and we have um gone through um and frankly almost all of the discussion with the planning board revolved around drainage and um I know that was brought up um in
the again in the dialogue. Um and our final um plans which were approved by both the DPW and the planning board. We have reduced the drainage, frankly, as much
as humanly possible based on a pvious um surface of gravel with no um subgrade material. So, we're basically putting gravel on existing glacial till
uh for maximum pviousness through the um stone. And frankly, that's what's out there now. It's dirt. Um, and the stone will just help kind of mitigate any dust in the middle of the summer and make it just a little bit
more easy to keep flat. Um, but generally speaking, our our goal is to not add any pviousness and we worked through that with the engineering and um the uh planning board. And the drainage structures are
essentially just for um roof runoff and they're designed as such. Um, so we do have an existing special permit um that number 0622,
the latest version of it. Um, and essentially we're looking for an update to that special permit to include this building. I think that's all I got. >> You want to start off? >> Why not?
Uh the last was it eight units that you built? Are those all rented? >> Um yep. >> Yep. >> Um so obviously the need for more. It's >> exactly the intention of this section of
town. Um and uh I mean I've known your family for decades. They're hardworking, intelligent, and honest. And uh you've already proven many times over that you have the ability to manage this and uh are what you have and I have no reason
to doubt that anything would change. >> Thank you. Appreciate that. >> I had no issues. I I guess just could you give me a little more color? You're looking to rent two bays of the building >> and there's no fire suppression. There's
no no water being fed there. I guess for the renters, what type of folks are renting from you that the place burns down? They can't stop it. >> It it I mean there's fire alarm. We're building to the building code. >> Mhm. >> Any structure less than 7,500 square ft,
>> right? >> Does not require a fire suppression system. Um we're not building to 74.99. We're building into a structure that fits on our built on our footprint and kind of works within the um travel path of the
property and the topography etc. the existing retaining walls are there. We're not trying to expand anything. So this is just a size that fits. >> Yeah. No, >> your point is fair. >> Um the demising walls are well they're technically not one hour rated by code.
They are built to a one-hour rating standard. 58 on either side, insulated, framed. Um and uh yeah, no fair assessment, but um
you know, uh we've got a um hydrant on site now bas just based on all the other >> Oh, okay. No, everything's fine. I just uh that was more personal interest than anything else. So, I appreciate that. Thank you. >> Yep. >> Frank, do you have anything? Not at the
present time. No. >> Will you show me on the plane where the hydrant is? That was my question, too. These >> Yeah. >> No. No. There's no sprinklers or anything like that planned, right? >> No. >> Like nothing. >> Um, wait. Is there one here?
>> Right. Right. Right. >> Yeah. Yeah. Like right right here. So, it's down. It'll it's a slope from the back side of this building to this drive probably
10 feet of of slope walkable across a flat drive and it's like in this area right here. There actually is like a gravel drive that I mean a gravel um access path right here and it's you
know right kind of right there. So, it's probably 100 125 ft from the building. >> That's good. >> Because we didn't hear from fire >> fire department at all. >> We did not. >> No,
>> they they weighed in at the plant planning tracked them down and there was no comment. >> Um, and not that this plan's changed anything, but um and I I I realize it's not the same. You need to refuse probably, but
>> just makes me nervous. That's all. Jim, do you have anything? >> Um, no, I don't have any questions. My the concerns have been addressed with previous questions. Uh, I think there could be some permissible use issues, but that's an enforcement issue down the road. So, I have no questions. It's it's an industrial zone and this is a believe
a proper place for this. >> Tommy, I'm I'm not really sure what why you're here. Uh, is this a permitted use? Evidently not. >> No.
>> Is it a special permit use? >> Yes. That's why I'm here. >> And I'm ask I'm leading into where I'm going to go with this. >> Yeah. >> If it's a special permit use, is it a lumber use? As you said, you're going to be renting out two bays.
>> Will those two bays require special permits as well? >> As far as I understand and my interpretation, the answer is yes. So they would have to come before us before you could rent it to them. >> Uh oh, the rent. Oh, sorry. No, the rented.
No, for the lumber purpose. No, that's not rented because that that >> All right, so let me All right, let me let me back up. Uh because I really don't understand. I truly don't understand. And I and I think you're wonderful. I'm I'm here because uh as I read it,
contractor yard is a special is is an approved use with a special permit and that's what I'm looking for approval on. >> So you're looking at this is a contractor's yard. So I need to know that. >> Yeah. >> Because it says storage building, but
you're going to be using this as a contractor yard facility. >> Leave it. My concern is you're going to rent out two bays, which theoretically may not be permittable uses, maybe require special permitted uses, and if
they are special permitted uses, you can't rent them until those tenants come here and get a special permit. Am I correct? >> Or or I have to come and get one because >> or you have to or whoever does. >> Yeah. I I mean I I realize that um that that that not every single potential
renter is straight up allowed uses here. >> Okay. >> Um you know, if I want to, >> Madam Chair, >> if I want to build bombs, I got to come probably get a use even if it's legal. If I want to have I don't know. I don't
know. We've got a long list of potential tenants and most of them fit straight down the middle of exactly what we're trying to do and intermingle well with the tenants that we already have there. I'm a contractor for example. I have one
I have a bay in one of our already existing buildings. We've got another guy who does um um sewer treatment plants and build sewer treatment plants. A contractor, he's got a bay there. So do a couple other builders. A painter. Those uses are already permitted on all
the structures we already have. And like I say, we have a list of people who want space for the exact same reason. If it I I don't want to name I don't want to name uses that may or may not be allowed without special permit, but I do
know that a long list of people that we do want there are allowed if granted this special permit. >> Before Mr. Fineran steps in here, because I do want to come back to this, don't misunderstand me. I I think you have a wonderful business there. So, but there are things that if this is
approved that I might suggest go to conditions within the decision. That's all. I just why I bring them up. >> No, it's it's it's fair and I appreciate the conversation. >> Go ahead and interrupt. >> I think just the extra level is is to
ensure that like you said, people aren't there making bombs or whatever. I mean, this area of town is intended for contractor yards and that's how they're using it, but it it's not unlimited is the way I interpret it. Anyway, >> Madam Chair, the reason I asked the
questions because the planning board approved it as storage space. There was no mention of a contractor's yard in any of the approvals and I did not understand what he was what the applicant was applying for to use this as. makes all the sense in the world is
being used as a contractor yard. If any of the bays that he rents out requires special permits versus a by right use of it, those he or those tenants have to come back here. >> That's all. >> Yeah. Okay. Thank you very much, >> Nick. You good? >> Good.
>> Anybody else have any further questions? >> No. >> Anybody from the public want to speak on this? I think we're good. >> Yeah, it just still bothers me with the firepower. Go ahead. >> Motion to close. Testimony. >> Testimony.
You're on that. We have a motion to close. Are you all set? >> I'm all set. >> Testimony. >> Testimony. Testimony. I almost forgot myself. Uh, all those in favor? Everybody's all set, right? All those in favor? >> I discuss. >> Thank you.
>> We're not done. >> We're not done yet. That was just to close. >> Oh, sorry. >> Any discussion? >> We're all set. All right. Motion to approve with conditions. >> Second that >> finding >> before you do. >> Yeah.
>> Can I interject something? >> Yeah. >> Yeah. >> When we talk about conditions, I I would like the board to consider the fact that there should be a condition that provides for any nonbyright uses of those bays have to come back to this board for a special permit. I mean,
that doesn't always happen. I mean, we talk about enforcements, but you know, does it get enforced? I don't know. So, I just want the board to consider that before you get into that. >> I don't I just like to make a comment, too, that um in reviewing this application,
you're dealing with a section of the zoning bylaw that's quite frankly ambiguous. And um now this board has granted you a previous permit for that 8 bay accessory building. The planning board has given
you site plan review, but there's enough ambiguity in this bylaw that somebody else down the line may disagree. And as Mr. Morse has pointed out, you may have some some um issues later on with compliance, but you'll have to deal with that down the road.
>> Mr. Chair, >> right? Um under section 246.3B uses in a light industrial aid district uh permitted um uses an accessory that is uh uh accessory buildings are
permitted. Um however you have a situation here where it's going to be a contractor's yard and that is just by special permit. Um so uh that's why you're here because the special permit required for the contractor's yard purpose. Now, it's a
special permit with no special considerations except there's one of which I'll mention at the end. Under section 2402.1E, u we make the determination that the site is adequate for the proposed use. It is suitable for the proposed use. There's no no testimony of uh that
there'll be a negative impact on traffic flow and safety. There's no testimony there will be a negative impact on neighborhood visual character, views, and vistas. There's adequate sewage disposal. In fact, there's apparently no sewage disposal at all. Um, utilities are are fine and this will not affect
the supply of affordable housing because residential uses are not allowed in this district. You also, I believe, need a special permit under section 2401.5 A2 because in an industrial light a district, your maximum building height is 22 feet, but you're asking for 23
feet 8 in. And we are allowed to grant you a special permit provided you have a lot of 2 acres or more. And you have 7.4 acres. So you do qualify for that plan. >> Great. >> Do we need to amend to include both?
>> Yeah, we got to the decision's got to reflect two special requirements. >> And that's findings >> finding. >> So we can put that in conditions >> or do we need to amend the whole application to have both? I think we just made the finding because
it's a necessary component of what he's doing. It would go in the in Yes. In the findings, right? Yes. Excuse me. >> Something else? >> Yeah, go for it. >> Um, board had a question or concern about fire suppression. Applicants uh testimony was that fire department
appeared during the planning board review uh and they're satisfied. Will have to be built in accordance with state building code. >> All right. conditions. >> No, another finding. No opposition appeared at public hearing. >> Thank you.
>> And you had the height in the findings of the building 23 >> 23 feet 8 in. Is that correct, sir? >> Yeah. >> Yeah. >> Okay. So, over 22 in a light industrial aid district, you need that special permit, but he's got more than two acres, so we can grant it.
>> All right. So conditions um per plans all boards site plan um construction hours. Um that's about it.
Applicant or tenants shall be responsible for obtaining additional sub special permits for zoning for any non byright use. That's That's what Tony's was. >> That's what I was. >> Can you think of anything else when we
No, I think we're all set. Everybody all set? >> Yeah. >> We'll vote. All those in favor? I >> oppose? None. We're all set. All right. Where did it go? There it is. Now we go back.
Next up we have 07825 uh 123 Crystal Springs A North Thelmouth the Dennis. >> Okay, this is application 078 in the year 2025. Timothy D. Dennison trustee is applied to the BMA zoning board of
appeals for a special permit pursuant to sections 240.2A 2A and 240 11.3A4 of the Bama zoning bylaw to raise and rebuild the existing non-conforming single family dwelling and exceed 20%
lot coverage by structure zoning district is RC um the overlay district is wild harbor coastal pond overlay district it's also a nitrogen sensitive area the existing single f is existing um structure is a
single family dwelling 3-bedroom 180 ft². The proposal is a single family dwelling 3bedroom 2438 square ft. No previous decisions of the zoning board of appeals noted. The lot is 10,450
ft in a zoning district which currently requires 40,000 square ft. Street frontage is 110 ft in a zoning district which currently requires 100 ft. Uh Crystal Spring Avenue at this location is a public right of way.
The existing lot coverage by structure is 10.3%. It was increased to 23.3%. The limit is 20% but were allowed to grant a special permit up to 25%. The um average lot coverage by structure
in this zoning district according to the worksheet provided is 20.61 um percent. Lot coverage by structure parking and paving. It's currently 13.6%. It will be increased to 33.7%.
The limit is 40% so it's within limits. The existing structure is uh non-conforming in one respect. Uh the setback from the street is 23.6 ft in the zoning district which currently requires 25 ft. But we're informed and
Mr. Clara will confirm that the new building will conform to zoning and that nonconformity will be removed. The height of the proposed structure is 34 feet 2 in. 35 ft is the limit.
Engineering has advised us that a driveway permit may be necessary. There appear to have been some trees removed from the public rightway which just so note. Uh the engineering also asks us to
consider storm water runoff and uh condition appropriate appropriately. The board of health has advised us the properties on the new silver beach sewer. Conservation Commission has no comment. Water um department requests an
upgrade to 1 in PE. Building department, no comment. Planning board, no comment. And we do have a letter from the wastewater superintendent Amy Lyel advising us that the new Silverbe sewer district limits bedrooms to three. Uh
the plans appear to show four bedrooms, so it would not be in compliance with the sewer bylaw and Mr. Clower will have to address that issue. Uh there are no letters in opposition or support on file. >> Thank you very much. Thank you, Madam Chair, Mr. Duffy, members of the board.
For the record, Kevin Clower. I'm an attorney with Amed Clower Law Firm here in Felmouth. And I'm before you tonight representing Tim and Kaitlin Dennis, the owners of 123 Crystal Springs, Crystal Spring Avenue. Uh I'm joined tonight by Kenny Costka, who is the builder on this project. Uh Tim and Caitlin couldn't be
here. They're actually expecting their third child at any moment. It could actually be this moment. The way I spoke to Tim earlier, he wasn't very focused on the hearing tonight, let's put it that way, which is understandable. Um they're seeking permission to raise and rebuild the existing non-conforming
dwelling. So this property 123 Crystal Spring is located really in the center of New Silver Beach Avenue. We had another project at 83 just a few weeks a few months ago at this point now. Um this is a dense largely seasonal neighborhood. This particular lot is 10,450
ft which is actually very large for the area. Um it is the residential Cz zoning district and it's not in a flood zone. So presently there's a three-bedroom single family dwelling with a footprint of uh just under 1100 square f feet. It is non-conforming to front yard setback
being 23.6 where 25 is required but otherwise conforms to setback and lot coverage requirements. Um the applicants recently purchased this property. Um they're a young family and as I've noted the presently expanding family with the third child eminent. Um they need more space and the
house needs significant repairs cosmetically and and structurally. Uh given the scope of the desired renovation, it makes most sense to raise and rebuild this this structure. I should note that while they just purchased this property, um Miss Mrs. Dennison has grown up in New Silver
Beach in the summer. She's been here for um basically the entirety of her life. The applicant's proposal does not create any new dimensional nonconformities. It eliminates the only existing non-conformity, which is that 5 yard setback. It'll be improved 23.6 ft to 25.2.
It'll exceed all other setback requirements. The sideyard set back to the east is 12 ft. The rear yard set back will be 32 and the sideyard set back to the west will be 32 ft. The block coverage by structure is increased 23.3, but that is allowable by special permit. The lot coverage by structures,
paving, and parking increased, but it's 33.7, which is well below the 40% that's allowed. The proposed height will be 34t 2 in. That's to the railing. The ridge itself is approximately 30 ft. Uh we expect the board may want height certification. We'd be happy to provide that and uh for
the board to include it as a condition if they see fit to approve this. Due to the existing nonconformity and proposed law coverage by structure, this requires a special permit pursuant to uh section 240.2A and section 240 11.3A4.
Under 240 10.2A, 2A pre-existing non-conforming structures may be changed by special permit provided they're not substantially more detrimental than exists. The board has asked to consider the standards of 242.18 and whether or not the alteration creates any new dimensional non-conformities impairs
views and vistas and reasonably conforms to the neighborhood. In this case, there's no new non-conformity created. The only existing non-conformity is eliminated doesn't impact views and vistas and as we will elaborate it is consistent with the neighborhood under 240 11.384
block coverage above 20% may be allowed by special permit and boards asked to consider the size and height of the structure in relation to the neighborhood effects of shadow impacts on views and vistas public ways and the effects of nitrogen on coastal payments. In this case there's no impact of views and vistas for public ways. Uh while it
is a public way, it is it is really a dirt road at this portion uh of Crystal Spring and it it's effectively a dead end just past this property. Um as to the size and fit of the neighborhood, we did submit a lot comparison worksheet for the nearby properties uh looking at homes within a
300t radius. Uh this is a large house relative to many of those properties specifically in terms of gross floor area. However, it's also one of the larger lots. So relative to lot size, it's very much in character. The proposed lot coverage by structure is just slightly above the average for the
neighborhood. It is similar in size to a number of homes that have been permitted by this board uh in this neighborhood and constructed within the last few years. Um relative to the engineering referral, we have spoken with the tree warden and that'll be addressed through the building process and we did receive
the referral from uh Miss LOL this weekend uh this earlier this week rather. Um I provided a response to Miss LOL on I believe Monday evening addressing her questions and concerns set forth therein. Um she noted that there's a number of rooms that could potentially be used as bedrooms.
However, one element uh that's determinative for bedrooms is privacy. The standard with this board and with board of health has long been that a 4ft cased opening eliminates the privacy, therefore making it not a bedroom. One of the other standards is that you can't have a bedroom off of a bedroom. You
can't have to go through a bedroom to get to a bedroom. that inherently destroys the privacy there. So for those reasons, neither the bedroom office nor the closet in the master bedroom could be considered bedrooms. Based on that, there's only three proposed bedrooms. There's the master
bedroom and the two on the second floor. Uh Miss LOL was citing to the alternate method of determining bedroom count set forth in title 5 wherein uh above a certain point you count the total number of rooms and divide by two rounding down to get to a bedroom count. Um but that
section goes on to say that uh the applicant can restrict to a fewer than than is presumed. Um so in this case even if you were to do a bedroom a total room count and divide by two and round down you get to four bedrooms. That's how I think Miss LOL got to that number.
But what we're really proposing is three bedrooms. And we're asking for three bedrooms and a condition of this board that it be three bedrooms serves as that restriction that would be allowed under the title 5 definition. Beyond that, this meets the requirements of 240 12.1E. The site's adequate and
suitable for the proposed use. It's a single family use and remain as such. There's no increase in the number of bedrooms. It is three bedrooms. It'll be proposed as three bedrooms, so there's no change in wastewater. There's no impact on traffic flow or safety. It's the same use as the present. The proposal uh improves the appearance and
functionality, which is uh in character with the neighborhood and won't adversely impact views and vistas from public ways. And there are adequate utilities which service the property. there's no adverse effect on public services. The Dennison's proposal represents a significant improvement over the existing conditions of the
applicants uh eliminating the only existing nonconformity with no new dimensional non-conformity being created. There's no adverse effects that overbalance the benefits that I've outlined. In short, there's nothing about this proposal that is substantially more detrimental than
the existing structure. I believe this meets all the requirements of 240.2A, 2A 240 11.384 and 240 12.1E. I believe this board can and should grant the special permit. I would uh ask that you do so, but I would of course be happy to address any questions that the board may
have. >> You want to start down that in? >> Yeah. Um I actually uh was running late. I parked in your hedges and I left my paperwork in the car. But um when I went
there yesterday afternoon, what struck me immediately was this is seems to be pushing the envelope a little bit. And then um I only saw uh Amy's letter
um moments before I came here. Um I mean we we have a constant problem with people submitting things the last minute, but um would it be possible for you to read that in its entirety? I actually have a copy. I'd be happy to
read that and my response to Miss Hall if you'd like, Mr. Finan. >> I actually would. The bedroom up the bedroom thing. And >> yeah, it pulled out a couple of shoe horns here. >> Yep. So, the email from Amy came in uh
it was Tuesday at 4:31 to Norine says, "Hello, Norin. Thank you for reaching out to me. The properties connected to sewer with a gravity connection and the new Silver Beach SU sewer service area in which the town's bylaw limit the number of bedrooms to three. According to title 5, where the total number of
rooms for single family dwellings exceeds eight, not including bathrooms, hallways, unfinished sellers, and unheated storage areas, the number of bedrooms presumed shall be calculated by dividing the total number of rooms by two, then rounding down to the next lowest whole number. The plan shows three rooms labeled bedrooms, but a
total of at least eight rooms that are greater than 70 square ft and are not bathrooms, hallways, unfinished shellers, and unheated storage areas and could be used as bedrooms. A study, three bedrooms, office, closet off of the master bedroom, family room on the top floor, and family room in the basement. It appears that this should be
counted as at least a four-bedroom house, which is therefore not in compliance with the town's new Silver Beach Sewer Service area bylaw. Uh other notes that the property owners contractor needs to contact the DPW wastewater division to schedule the wastewater division to come to witness
the cut and cap of the existing sewer connection before the existing home is demolished and the property owner's representative will need to come to the DPW to apply for a sewer connection permit providing a plan that shows the proposed new sewer connection to the house. Amy.
So I received that from Miss Stockman at 4:38 on Tuesday at 5:54. I responded to both her and Miss LOL stating uh and copying in Scott Mcan as well. Hi Amy Norine forwarded to me the referral that
you provided to the zoning board relative to 123 Crystal Spring Avenue and I would greatly appreciate a few moments to discuss it with you further at your convenience. While it's been my understanding that in sewer areas we default to the definition of bedroom under the title 5 regulations being a room providing privacy intended
primarily for sleeping and consisting of all the following. A floor space of no less than 70 ft. B for new construction a ceiling height of no less than 7' 3 in. C for existing houses and for mobile homes a ceiling height of no less than 7'0 in. D an electrical service and
ventilation. And E at least one window. I have never previously seen the alternate bedroom count utilized in a sewer area. One of the elements that determines whether a room is a bedroom is privacy. It's been the standard that if a room has not a door, but instead a 4ft cased opening, that it's not
considered to be private and therefore not a bedroom. Another accepted practice is that a bedroom cannot be located off of another bedroom as it would lack the requisite privacy. For example, neither the office nor the master closet, which can only be accessed through the master bedroom bathroom, would be considered a
bedroom for lack of privacy. And that a room accessed only via a stairway that is open with half walls to the area below would not be considered a bedroom. I've copied Scott Mcan on this email as he may be able to verify the information of set forth herein as to his practices in determining the number of bedrooms
under the title 5 regulations. Under this methodology, there would only be three proposed bedrooms. The master bedroom and the two other bedrooms on the second floor. The office on the first floor has a 4ft cased opening and lacks privacy from the living area. Neither the office nor the closet attached to the master bedroom will count as they can only be accessed
through the master bedroom. The storage area on the second floor is less than 70 ft. The family room on the upper story is open to the stairs and floor below, thereby lacking privacy, and the basement level rooms lack adequate egress to be considered a bedroom. There are no windows. It's also worth noting that the
alternate bedroom count methodology set forth in the title 5 regulations goes on to state the applicant may design a system using design flows for a smaller number of bedrooms than are presumed in this definition by granting to the approving authority a deed restriction limiting the number of bedrooms to the smaller number. A special permit
decision issued by the zoning board of appeals that contained a condition that the property be limited to three bedrooms would serve as that restriction and the applicant would be agreeable to a separate recordable restriction to the same effect if need be. Relative to your other points, the applicant would be more than agreeable to include any of those as a condition of the decision. I
hope that after your review, you'll agree with this assessment. I would be glad to discuss it with you further at your convenience. >> You don't have me on I have to agree with Amy.
I think it pushes the envelope a little too much. Um I mean I I don't have anything further at the moment. >> Could you pull up the uh front elevation? Do you have that? >> Yeah, I do.
>> Thank you. Uh just again confirmatory uh to Mark's point if we are well I guess from my perspective we would have to we'd have to condition the three bedrooms uh we or I would like to see the asbuilt for the height
>> at the we're at 342 and I get could you give us or the board a little more color on what's going on with the the trees and the clearing of the trees? So, there were um two trees specifically right here that
are very much in uh what's going hopefully to be the driveway. Those were removed sometime over the past 15 months. I don't think anyone realized those were in the road layout. Again, it's a dirt road in this area. It's not real clear. Um I spoke with Jeremiah Pearson, the tree warden. We'll address
that through the building permit process. There'll be a required planting of one or two trees to address it. >> Thank you. You all set, Scott? >> Yes, >> Frank. >> You're all set? >> Yeah. >> I also have huge concerns with all these
rooms that you're going to pretend on bedrooms. >> Well, I think it's worth sellers, too. And there's a study. There's an office. I'll give you the one that's off the M. How big is that master bedroom including that extra room? >> Um, well, >> I mean, I'd love to have an extra room
in my master bedroom. >> So, what what you see here is the master bedroom. There was an office here and then there's a closet here. They're not bedrooms, Miss Murphy. They're simply not. Those are Again, you can't have a bedroom that can only be accessed through another bedroom. It It's >> No, I'll give you that one.
>> Um >> I just want to know how big is that master bedroom? >> Uh uh 24 by 8 by 17 less some. So, um
>> it's massive. uh it's about probably around 350 ft just the bedroom itself. >> And what's that little study next to it? The I mean storage next to that room that won't be a bedroom that says office. Well,
>> what's that little storage area size? >> It's a a linen storage area. >> Linen? What's the size? >> That's under 70 square feet over here. >> Is it 70 feet? >> It's probably 68 square ft. I don't know. I mean, it wasn't designed to try to skirt that rule. It's just that's how
big it ends up being. >> Just asking. >> No window either. >> No windows. >> No window. >> I mean, I'd still throw my kid in a room with no window. >> Perhaps a different story. We should >> We could ask my kids. They'll tell you. They would probably agree. >> Anyway, I just have a real hard time
with that. That's That's just me. >> Jim, u couple concerns getting to I think some of the other board's concerns. It would make this a little easier for me. Um why do you need a full bath on the uh the ground the
basement floor, foundation floor? There's no residential dwelling living down there. >> So, again, just it's three children. It's it's a it's just an area where the children can be with a bathroom down there. There's a utility room. There are no while there are, you know, basement
windows which are, you know, the >> I I take no exception to the a half bath, but the full bath is what I'm kind of saying could be speaks to the the bedroom issue. The other >> thing that's a little concerning, u I
agree with your analysis. I don't consider the the master closet or the bath to be clearly not bedrooms. Um I'd love a closet that big. >> Uh that's fine. I and and clearly it's I don't believe that to be my concern is the office off the master bedroom. Yes,
there are cased entrances, but lose the ex lose the door there going out to the hallway. I you have a legit office. I'm very concerned that that's just ripe for abuse there. uh that that case entrance could be closed up very quickly with California closets and that would clearly become a bedroom at that point.
Uh so I think that the concerns of wastewater super are if you could lose that door I it kind of puts my concerns to bed. >> Still got another floor. >> That's wide open though. That's I can't
conscious find that as u this is like pushing it to the limit here. >> I also think it's worth noting that you know really but for the the porch this wouldn't be above 20%. Um you know we are about 300 square feet over what
constitutes 20% lot coverage. Um, so you know, without that, this becomes effectively a by- project, which it seems silly to have them have to remove a porch and do the same project by right
without having to go through this. Um, when this can be allowed by this board and really what we're talking about is is the lot coverage. >> And that's probably one of the largest lots in Silver Beach. Uh looking at when I
did the lot comparison worksheet, I think there were at least six or seven that were within the radius that were the same size. It's basically a double lot and there's a number of double lots in the area, including directly next door at 117. >> There's a lot of said the one next to >> four 5,000. There's small lots out there.
>> Yeah. Most >> there all the time. >> Most of them are about 5,000 twice today. >> Most of them are 5,200 some odd square feet. This one's 10,400. It's double. So, that's I mean, you got to compare it to your
neighbors. Um, >> let's move down to Tony. >> I I I can't believe that I I I really like this house. I think it's quite an improvement. I agree with Mr. uh Morse that that family room basement window partic downstairs, particularly with
that bath there, um could be a problem, but would really make this into a bedroom is if that window, which I didn't have a chance to look up, there's no window schedule, is a fire escape window. >> So, in the um my understanding is that on the
elevations, if we look, all the basement windows that we see are >> that's all the the smaller >> so they are definitely not >> they're not egress windows. >> All right. So, not egress windows. >> Um the other question I have and I think it's a beautiful house. Um, the other
question I have is is why doesn't that third garage door constitute a third bay? I mean, how would you not constitute that as a third bay in a under 30,000 foot lot? >> I mean, if
if you wanted us to amend the the application to include a third garage bay, we can do so. Um, I've never understood why we that needs a special purpose. Believe me, I I think it's it's one of the more foolish zoning bylaws we have, >> but it exists. And all I'm saying is if
it it looks like a third bay to me. I think that 12 ft is pretty narrow to turn around in for a car, but it just looks like a third bay. >> So really, you know, it's intended as access, you know, you can New Silver has quite a few golf carts. Um I don't know that they have a golf cart, but I wouldn't be surprised in the slightest.
That would be a great place to put a golf cart, but I don't think that would constitute a third garage bay the way we typically think of it. However, if you were more comfortable with me amending the application to include a request for a third garage bay, I could certainly do so. >> I simply want to point it out to the board to consider that and if there is
an opportunity to amend it, then maybe that's just the way to deal with it, but the board make that decision. >> It is under 900 ft. Um, the garage is 28 by 32 shown here, but you've got this mudroom cut out, so it'll ends up being less than 900 ft, which is one of the thresholds for needing a
>> 900. Is that what it is? All right. It's just a question. I just want to bring it up for consideration. Um I think it's uh my only concern was that downstairs room is a bedroom um with that full bath there. Uh the office itself, it's it's
an easy fix if need be, but those were my only concerns. Um, you know, when I first saw the plans, I thought I thought it was a great layout and uh, you know, I don't I see the concern for, you know, multiple
bedrooms, but, you know, I'd love to have an office off my bedroom and a closet. I mean, it I don't see I think we're we're saying they're going to do something they haven't have no intention of doing, making five, four bedrooms in
this house. I get it's a lot of rooms and a lot of walls, but you know, and I understand maybe maybe you do close that office door off, but I mean, I saw, you know, when I first looked at these plans, I saw three bedrooms with a lot of cool features, a laundry room, a nice office. That's, you
know, that's how I feel about this. I think it's, you know, I drove through there. It's, it is like one of the largest lots in that neighborhood. And if it, you know, percentage wise, it's consistent from what we allow. I think it fits. It is a big house though.
>> Anybody have any further questions that people have? >> We just follow up on Mr. Petrrui's question about that third garage bay. Is that service by a driveway or is there going to be lawn there? >> No, that'll be lawn. It's uh that's it'll be accessed over this way. So, it's really not even wide enough. You wouldn't want to bring a car down in
this area. >> Good. But the may I >> Yeah, go ahead. >> But the real issue is that it's the 900 square feet. >> Yeah. I mean, I think I I don't have the bylaws directly in front of me. I have it in my in my bag. But it's uh 900 ft
is one of the thresholds for >> needing a special permit for garage space because it says parking space more than two cars if exceeding 900 square feet or >> and going back to this uh Mr.
just talked about that office. How would how would you solve that if the board believes that that could be a fourth bedroom? What are you proposing to solve that with? How? >> So, um the office off of the master bedroom. >> Master bedroom. >> Yeah. I mean, we could remove the door
from the hallway and and just leave that open to the bedroom. >> Mhm. >> It's a 2668 door, though. >> Well, no. I mean, close it. Wall it off. Yeah, but I'm saying it would be a case 2668 versus >> No, not case it wallet off.
>> A wallet off. >> Yes. No access. >> Thank you. I appreciate Thank you. >> Anybody else have any further questions up here? >> Good. Anybody from the public want to speak? Come on up, sir. >> Thank you.
>> We need your name and address, please. Paul Costello. Um 127 Crystal Spring next door neighbor. I'm curious about this whole project actually. Um listen, I love to see the neighborhood advancing. I've been um I
it is not a dead end. It turns onto Milford Street, which was an abandoned uh uh project for for the town a long time ago. Uh but I grew up coming down to this area. um since 76. Um so I love
seeing the neighborhood advance. Uh very proud of um you know the the builders coming to the area and the projects that truly advance the area. Um I found out about this um hearing um when I got a
letter in the mail about um the meeting taking place. So, um, I was informed by a neighbor and again did a great job. Not I'm not taking sides here, but I just want to say like from my perspective. So, the next house that
you hit before the marsh is my house. It's an 1898 property that was uh the shack that the guys built uh the guys that built the old Silver Beach Hotel uh they lived in. Um and uh and then he
decided to make it his permanent home and he built the h house across the street which if you ever see it right at the corner there is the same style as the old Silver Beach Hotel. So I grew up coming to this area. I love this area and I want to see the area advance. However,
at the same time, I was informed by a neighbor of mine that the current owner of this property um wanted to take down some of the trees on my property. That was the that was the message and that was and yes, they have to go because they're the the the pines that have been
riddled by like the beetles or whatever it is and they got to go and it would block a view. However, I've never met my neighbor, my new neighbor. I knew the Edwards for a long time and the people that lived there, etc. through the years. Um, but I've never met my new
neighbor. I was informed through a neighbor of mine that he wanted to take some of the trees down. So, we connected over text and I said, "Yes, happy to talk with you. They've got to go. I have a three-year-old daughter and those trees have to go because they're falling down into my yard." However, um
it's a little strange as um Bill Dynan on the back side of my property, one of my good friends and very involved with the town, they're down in Florida checking on their house and I said, "Uh, did you hear anything about this?" And he said, "Looks like
they want to build something." Um it just feels a little strange. Like again, an area that I grew up in, Florence's, you know, the general store, the T-room back in the day. It just um it feels a little strange that I haven't even heard from my neighbor that he wants to uh
they want to do this. Um and like I said, I'm just stating it as a neighbor. It feels So again, if you look at the plot, could you bring up the plot line again? Just the overview. And I don't know the terminology here,
but >> want to stay by the mic. >> Yeah, there you go. >> So, this is my property right here, right? Like I don't know. 24 ft. 24 ft.
I don't know. I I don't know if that's I don't know if that's in code. This is not my world. >> Oh, well, that's fine then. That's great. Approved. Uh, no. Um, anyway, it's um it's interesting that I'm
hearing all of this through this hearing and um I guess I'm just curious about all the things. This is my first time in a in a meeting. I've I've watched some of these before, but this is my first time in a meeting like this. I'm
curious. I support my neighbor when we get to meet. Um, but uh it's it's uh it's all news for me. I'm just processing it though. So, thank you for your time. >> Thank you. >> All right, >> Attorney Claw, we know you we we urge
you to have these people go and speak to the neighbors all the time. >> I I understand and um you know, it's often times that does occur, sometimes it doesn't, and for a variety of reasons, >> and that's how it feels. >> I understand. I've received notices
myself and it's just unfortunately how sometimes how these things work out. Um, hearing that the board some of the board's comments, I think that we could make some revisions to the plans that would address some of the concerns. I
don't anticipate we would need all that much time. Um, so I would like to ask for a continue. Well, I'd like to hear more discussion if you're so inclined. Um, but at the end of this I my anticipation is I'll be requesting our continuation so we can
look at the plans and maybe make some modifications. >> I have comments. >> Go ahead. >> Um, you know, this the the sewering was basically forced on this neighborhood. Um, and they're all
constricted to three bedrooms. Um, nothing that we've approved comes close to the scope of this. And I know we approve things questionably,
almost weekly. I mean, how many gyms and libraries and whatever can you fit into a house? Um, >> wrapping rooms. >> Wrapping room. Uh there are a few others, but uh I didn't grow up in that
neighborhood, so I uh I I can't pull them off the top of my head, but I I just this just pushes the envelope too far for me >> knowing knowing what the people in the neighborhood um uh you know are restricted to. Uh it's
just I almost want to use the word blatant. But it seems Mr. Clower might uh be willing to trim some of the edges off this because I think it's absolutely necessary. >> Scott, you have anything further?
>> Yeah, I think to your point, Attorney Clower, it'd be nice if you go back to the applicant and you heard the comments here, Butter's comments, and and hopefully uh come back to us pretty quickly and relay our issues. Hopefully.
>> Thank you, >> Frank. You okay? >> Yes. >> I I'm on team Mark. I really think it's pushing pushing the buttons here. Glad to have you come back and open it up or whatever it takes.
>> Anybody else have anything up here? I just um I don't want to be negative, but I I I I think the fact that he went ahead and removed the trees in the public way and um uh you know, I'm not
saying they're uh demonstraable evidence, but it's when you encompass it all, it's I'm not comfortable. Anybody else from the public before we continue this?
You all set? Okay. I just thought you were signaling. Sorry. Everybody all set to um any further discussion? >> You have a date if I do >> you have a date for us? >> Uh January 8 of
>> quick. >> So my only concern with that is with the holidays, I'm not sure we'll be able to get to the plans too fast time. Um, I would love to have it that night, but um, I just know what the next four days look like for me. And I imagine, >> never mind, they're having the baby
tomorrow >> and and the matter of the baby, but you know, put that aside. Um, >> the 15th is full, right? So that's 21st. >> Okay. >> 22nd. >> Um, February 5th.
>> February. I can >> be five. >> Madam Chairman, I'll make a motion to continue with the applicant's request this hearing to February 5th, 2026. >> Second. >> We have a motion and a second. Any further discussion?
>> That's everyone. >> All set. >> Thank you. >> All those in favor? >> I oppose? None. >> All right. >> Continue to February 5th. >> Look forward to being back before you with this uh soon. >> Do not enter the trash. All right. Next at bat we have 08125
5 mil. Okay. We have um application uh 081 of the year 2025. Marilyn A. McMillan has applied to the zoning board of appeals for modification of the existing special permit pursuant to section 240.2A
of the code of FMLA to raise and rebuild the existing non-conforming detached garage with an accessory dwelling unit above. The property is is at five Melrose Avenue in Felmouth.
The zoning in this district is RC. There's no overlay district. Um the existing uh structure structure now is a single family dwelling four bedroomedroom with a detached garage total 2,253
ft. The proposal is for a single family dwelling, threebedroom with a detached garage and one bedroom total total of four. Um, and the square footage will with an an ADU or an accessory dwelling
unit. The total square footage will be 20 2,248 square ft. Um, there are a couple of special permits of record for this property. We have special permit 110 of the year 1998, which was a special permit for a
basement under the building with a bulkhead. Uh special permit 125 of the year 2000, special permit for the garage, which conforms to setbacks. That's the garage that's proposed to be raised and rebuilt.
Then we have special permit 62 of the year 2005 uh which was alteration and and an addition to the single family to the principal dwelling.
The um frontage excuse me the lot is 7,36 square ft in a zoning district which currently requires 40,000 square feet. I didn't get the frontage because it didn't appear on the plan.
Uh, Melrose Avenue is a public right ofway. Lot coverage by structure as it exists is 30.83%. It's going to be decreased slightly to 30.77%. The limit is 20%, so it's non-conforming. The average in the
neighborhood is 32.802%. Buck coverage by structure parking and paving is 42.4. it will be decreased to 35.2%. Um the limit is 40. So that will conform. Um the house principal
structure uh has two nonconformities. The street is 2.6 setback of 2.6 ft in a district that requires 25. The north um boundary the setback is 1.9 ft in a district which requires 10 ft. The
height of the proposed structure is 21.6 6 feet and the limit for an accessory structure in the district is 22 feet. Engineering has advised us that a driveway permit may be necessary uh as there may be some alterations to the right of way involved. They've asked
asked us to consider storm water runoff and erosion and sediment control. Board of health does no comment. Conservation no comment. The water department has advised us that the ADU will require an independent water service. Um and there was a comment from the planning board
which was withdrawn that had to do with um historic district apparently not appropriate. Building department had no comment. Uh we have one letter in support. >> What I saw? >> Did it just come in? >> I don't know. >> No, I think there's just one.
>> Is it only one? Okay. I thought I saw two. >> There is two. Yeah, >> there's two. >> Yeah, just came in. All right. Two. All right. Thank you, Mr. Duffy, Madam Chair. Uh, again, for the record, my name is Kevin Clower, and I'm before you tonight representing Marilyn McMillan, the owner
of Five Melrose Avenue. Um, Reverend McMillan is here with us this evening, along with her son and daughter-in-law, and as well as Beaches Bunker, the architect on this project, and Tom Bunker, BSS Design. Mrs. McMillan is applying for modification of the
existing special permits on this site which are special permit number 110-88 125-0000 and 62-05. Specifically, she's applying to raise and rebuild the existing garage in order to create a slightly larger larger
garage with an ADU above. So, five Melrose is located in the actual Heights part of Fmouth Heights. Um, as this board knows, it is an incredibly dense, largely seasonal neighborhood. This particular lot is 7,36 square feet in the RC zoning district, and it's not located in the flood zone.
Uh, the frontage here is 103 ft. Mr. Duffy, um, per your comment. Presently, there is a single family dwelling with four bedrooms and a detached garage. U, the property is currently non-conforming. The front yard set back to the main house is 2.6 where 10 is
required. The sideyard setback to the north is 1.9 where 10 is required. Lock coverage by structure is 30.83 where 20 is allowed by right and up to 25 by special permit. And the lot coverage by structure paving and parking is 42.4% where 40% is allowed. Uh I'd like to go
over some of the history of the site um and the existing permits in order to better understand this application. So Reverend McMillan has owned this property since 1988 and she's seeking to make upgrades to it presently. Special permit 110-88 allowed for renovations to
the rear portion of the home. Special permit 125- Z00 allowed for the construction of the detached garage and special permit 62-05 allowed for alterations to the existing non-conforming main house. that uh that decision noted that the log coverage
had been conforming at 28% but was made non-conforming by a change to the bylaw in 2002 which reduced the uh as of right lock coverage from 35% to 20%. That special permit 62-05 allowed for an increase in lot coverage by structures
to 31% and we are again at 30.83% right now. So, the applicant is now seeking to make modifications to the existing home which will be include removal of the existing decks and elimination of a bedroom in the main house uh as well as raising and rebuilding the existing garage. Uh in
order to expand the footprint, add habitable space above which will be an accessory dwelling unit. Due to the elimination of the bedroom and main house, there will be no net increase in bedroom count. Three in the main house, one in the ADU. The proposed renovations have no effect on the non-conforming setbacks. There's
no change to the footprint of the main house in those areas. Uh it improves the non-conforming lock coverage by structure slightly. Uh it goes from 30.83 to 30.77% which is a decrease of 5 square ft. It eliminates the non-conforming law coverage by
structures, paving and parking, reducing it from 42.4% down to 35.2%. Uh the ridge of the proposed garage and ADU is 21 ft 7 in. Um Mr. I think you said that accessory dwellings are limited to 22 feet, which is correct. Uh
but under the recent um guidance from the attorney general's office, I believe that the town is viewing ADUs as um no different than single family homes. So it's allowed to be 35 feet by right, but we are at 21 ft 7 in. >> Um due to ex the existing
nonconformities and the special permits, this requires a modification of those decisions and a special permit pursuant to 240 10.2A. Um, under that provision, pre-existing non-conforming structures may be changed by special permit provided they're not substantially more detrimental than what
exists. The board's asked to consider standards of 242.1E and whether or not the alteration creates any new dimensional non-conformities, impairs views and vistas, and reasonably conforms to the neighborhood. This project meets all those requirements. In this case, there's no new non-conformity created.
There's no effect of views and vistas from public ways and it is consistent with the neighborhood as I will go on to elaborate. Um though we did not include an application for special permit under 240 11.384 for lock coverage by structure in excess of 25%. Um because
this proposal is over 25 existing will remain over 25. I do want to review those requirements to show um both compliance with those considerations in conformance with the neighborhood. So under that provision um we are showing no impacts to views invest in the public
way though the garage and ADU is larger than what exists. We're uh we're replacing the existing structure and though taller the the house itself is not changing. The house itself is is very much at the forefront of this site. Uh there's no effect of nitrogen on coastal abayments. There's no change in
number of bedrooms. And as to the size and fit of the neighborhood, we submitted a lot comparison worksheet looking at 40 properties within a 300 foot radius. As proposed, the lock by structure is lower than the average and the footprint in Grisville area is certainly not outliers to the neighborhood.
The driver for the proposed alterations here is the ADU. Um because the ADU is a byight use, the bird's perview is somewhat limited. So the question effectively becomes is the change to the existing non-conformity which is a reduction of lock coverage by structure
substantially more detrimental than what exists. I think the answer to that has to be it is not substantially more detrimental and it is in fact an improvement. The project as proposed represents an improvement for the owners adding useful habitable space in the form of an ADU. It slightly reduces the non-conforming
law coverage by structure, eliminates the non-conforming law coverage by structures, paving and parking, and beyond that it meets the requirements of 240 12.18. Uh the site's adequate and suitable for the proposed use. It remains single family dwelling, same as at present. There's no increase in bedrooms, so
there's no change to wastewater. There's no impact on traffic flow or safety. It's the same uses at present. And the proposal improves the appearance and functionality being in character with the neighborhood and won't adversely impact views and vistas from public ways. There are adequate utilities that service the site and there's no adverse
effects on public services. I believe this uh I believe we've demonstrated this meets all the requirements 240.2A and 12.1E. I would ask the board grant the special permit and happy to address any questions that you may have at this time.
>> Should I start down that side? >> Let's change it up. in the middle. >> That'll make it easier. >> Let's start with you, Nick. >> I'm good right now. >> You're all set. Yeah, >> Tony. >> Well, I think I just heard about ADUs
over my right. There's no differentiation between an ADU that stands alone, an ADU that sits on top of a garage. So, if you have a garage with an ADU, you can go to 35 ft. That's my understanding. That's what I've been told by the planning department and the
building department. >> I don't know what the attorney general says. >> Well, that that's their that's the guidance they've received from the attorney general's office. I haven't spoken to the Miss Campbell lately. >> So, we have there's you have >> you know you can call them up anytime. >> So,
>> direct line. So that is the town's position now that a ADU standalone can be 35 ft max 35 ft an ADU above a garage >> be 35 ft >> without any differentiation. Correct. >> But that's kind of a foolish thing
because >> have you seen our bylaw? >> Uh unfortunately for two and a half years I've been trying to yes understand the bylaw. >> Foolish is how I make a >> remember the one we had on >> but I would point out Mr. Petrie that the the height is 21 ft 7 in. I just
want I just want to understand that >> that is that is what is going to come up again. >> That is what has been conveyed to me through many discussions with u the planning department with Machman with Mr. Street. >> Yeah. I I just need to catch up I guess on that. >> Yeah. The the state stance is that these
are effectively >> smaller single family dwellings and therefore are entitled to the same dimensions as a single family dwelling as far as height goes. So, >> remember the one we had on Corer Road? It negated the enforcement.
>> Mhm. >> I have no I think it's a wonderful project. I have no other questions. >> If you know, Attorney Clower, uh, letters in support, are they immediate neighbors or Butters? >> Uh, I believe one comes from this neighbor over here, and I'm not sure
where the other one came from. >> One came from California. >> Uh, that's Harson. So, that would be over this way across Melrose. >> Okay. Uh architecturally, yeah, I agree with you. I think it's a very nice project. I think it would improves uh functionality of the property. I can't say it's more
detrimental. You're going down five square feet. It's dimminimous, but that is less detrimental. So, that's an improvement. So, I've uh I have no reservations for this project. Thank you. >> Doesn't need to be less detrimental, just not substantially. >> Not substantially more detrimental. A dimminimous reduction is still a reduction, though. So, thank you. I
think the the addition of the pvious pavers and such will make a very nice aesthetic without dealing with storm water. So, Mr. Bunker, well done, >> which they're already dealing with heavily on that street. >> Yes. >> Um, can you show me where the bedroom is that we're losing?
So, so we're showing one, two, three on the second floor right now and one on the first floor. And what you're showing here is um so if we look
on the second floor. >> Yep. We're eliminating. >> Yeah. So, this becomes this one here is eliminated as a bedroom. >> So, you're changing the >> the door and everything. >> Mhm. Do you want to speak to the
>> So I have existing here in the post here. >> Mr. Spunker the architect. What we're doing is the existing stair that goes up is only 2 feet wide. So we're widening it to three feet to make it a conforming stair. And therefore that bedroom number
one uh the former bedroom number one is now being reduced and is by far less than 70 square feet because it's all under the roof line and that will become the closet of the larger bedroom that we
live say bedroom number three. Good. Okay. >> You you okay? >> I guess I'm buying that. >> Okay. >> So, you have to remember too that that's under a slipping roof. >> So, so much of that room is not >> bang your head >> remotely habitable in the sense that you
know it's doesn't need code for for habitable space. >> And did we did we sort out the PA problem? >> We a revised plan was submitted to the board last week. There was an email sent from the engineering department saying that they were satisfied. >> Okay.
>> I'll just follow up on that. Your plan show that you're removing the deck and you're removing the patio and apparently replacing it with proposed uh pvious pavers. Correct. Is that part of your application or you just going to do that by writing?
>> So that that's part of the application. That's what that's where the reduction in the lot coverage by structural paving and parking comes from because the pvious pavers don't actually count towards the lot coverage. We gave the details of the pvious pavers to the engineering department and they signed off on that. >> All right. So it reduces your lot
coverage by structure but you actually >> by structure paving and parking >> by structure parking and paving but you actually don't need it special permit to do it. >> No, I don't believe so. >> Right. Um and then then the work inside where
uh the architect just testified you're widening the staircase to the second floor and thus reducing the size of that extra room. That's totally interior. >> It is. However, we have the existing >> I know it's moving the bedroom to the accessory. But that work itself can be
done without the special per >> except for the fact we have existing special permits on the property which all right say you know any changes to the property any changes to the plans require approval from the board. So, I think we're modifying an existing special permit, but yes, in the abstract
that would not require a special permit. >> All right. >> Uh, thank you for the explanation on the bedroom. I'm glad it wasn't just a magic wand that was changing it. So, I appreciate that. So, no further questions. Um other than to point out in your
initial presentation you uh stated that the uh setback from Melrose was 10 ft. Actually it's 25 but 2.5 but you >> either way we're still kind of >> Yeah. Yeah. I understand. But you just did misspoke and I mean I'll find any
mistake you know. >> That's okay. >> Um I we've spent a lot of time on this street in the last couple of years. been a lot of work here and uh and I'm familiar with the neighborhood anyway and for some reason I've always liked this house and uh now I'm going to like it more.
>> Yeah. >> And I I thought the design of the garage is really um really attractive the way it's built into the hill so it takes advantage of the slope there. >> Very nice lines. >> One of your favorite neighborhoods. >> This very much is >> one of the nicest This very much is one
of my favorite neighborhoods. If you if you if I hit the lottery and get to choose any house anywhere, it's going to probably be uh up around here. >> Tom, did you do that? Good job. >> You did it. Good job. >> Great. It really is.
>> Good job. >> This is This is the I think I think Beatus has done all the plans on us going back to 2000. >> Good job. Yeah, it's good >> to the public. >> The actual brains of the bunker family.
>> Anybody else have any further questions up here before we go to the public? >> You all set down there, Nick? You good? Anybody from the public want to comment? >> Guess we're all set. >> Do you have anything? Um, I think the only note I put on
my notes was the issue about uh steps being included in lock coverage or not. >> I did see the note from I think Mr. Bunker about, oh, we're getting rid of the stairs because they count and the granite stairs don't count.
>> Yeah. >> Jokes's on us on that one, isn't it? >> Well, that's >> Say I'm sorry, Madam Chair. Point of interest. What what was that about the stairs? >> There was a email, I don't remember who it went to, that they're getting rid of the wooden stairs because they count towards structure >> lock coverage
>> and lock coverage and when they're they're putting in granite because that doesn't count. >> Well, we've had this discussion for what we >> never resolved it. I >> I also think more specifically they were removing the deck. Yeah, >> the deck was substantial in size that was being removed
>> and um that that's that's that was the point of Tom's email or the portion of Tom's email that I captured and sent an orient. >> I need I need a little clarity on this because this is this is again more foolishness in this town. >> Such foolishness. >> If you need stairs to get into a
building by code, it's part of the building. It is not a landscape feature. If you want to take those grand stairs and move maybe a few feet away from the building, it's a nice landscape feature. How much more simple can we get >> for us in this town to understand that
>> 50 years of doing it the other way? I mean, >> well, I mean, it becomes just >> You're welcome to turn this >> to do this >> ocean liner around. >> So, my question is, has that been counted into the reduction? >> Yes.
>> Yes, it has. And it's very small, but it this really irks me because it's just such a simple matter. Attached to the house. You needed to get in the house. The building code requires stays to get in the house. It's part of the house. >> So, respectfully, Mr. Petruchi, I would
say um I understand your point, but that's not what the bylaw says. And to the extent that it >> What? Excuse me. What does the bylaw say? So it it doesn't say if it's attached you count them or if you need them you count them. It just says landscaping features are not included as
lock >> but you have to for >> stairs are a landscape >> stairs are not a it is a it's part of the building code. We have an architect here who's not going to speak on this subject but stairs are part of the building code. >> So that has not been I I know we've had
this discussion a number of times. There's never been a resolution on this right >> that I'm aware of. We can make a resolution right now. >> Well, what I would suggest is amend the bylaw. >> Yeah. >> But but but but why not spec if there was a process by which you can go to the
planning board? Anyone can go to the planning board and and have this clearly spelled out in a bylaw because as we've talked about ambiguity is well it's where we make our living. >> Well then we have ambiguity means we have to use our discretion. >> It is >> and our discretion should be it's
stairs. I understand your position. >> Take history into it and historically it's been the other way. >> I madam chair I I don't want I I apologize. I don't want to keep going but this is such foolishness that it just continues to astound me every time we hear it. I'll let it go for the
moment. >> I still think he should at least count it in structure in his block coverage. >> Well, we've discussed this. I know Madam Chair. I was going to suggest that if the board is going to take a very clear position on this to count it, it needs to be that it one it should be noticed
in a in in an open meeting, we should request comments from anyone who's practicing before sending notice out to various architects to let put the world on notice that hey, by the way, going forward, we're going to consider this that out of fairness. In the meantime, ambiguity is usually held against
someone. uh in contract law, it's held against the person who made the contract. So, I don't think it's unreasonable for attorney Clower to hold it against it. Not but to interpret it uh in favor of the ambiguity, but we're not noticed for that tonight. So, >> but there's no contract here.
>> No, I understand law and notice and opportunity to be heard is always a basic requirement before some type of resolution or statutes enacted or a rule published. You are far more learned than I am and we should follow your your designs.
>> It's a valid point. I think we need to have resolution modify the bylaw. >> Yeah, it should be with and the lots are so small around here. We should give them a minimum. >> Anything beyond, you know, three steps
and three feet is a >> an abuse. I mean, I I it's always been that way. what we're wrestling with. >> Wooden stairs count, >> but granite stairs which are thicker and not porous and nothing rain can't go through
>> don't count the issue through madam chairman is there no fault of the applicant. No, no, no, no. It's not also point out that a 4x4 landing doesn't come later. >> So, and somewhere that has to be modified and >> All right. So, we'll just beat that drum like a million more times. Right. Right.
>> But we have to get it into a vote onto agenda. >> No, Jim Jim had it right. Exactly. >> That's what he just said. >> I'll make a motion to close testimony. Madam Chairman, >> second that. >> We have a motion to close. Any further discussion?
You all said? You all set? >> Yes. >> Everyone down here? >> Frank, you good? >> I'm in. >> All those in favor of closing? I none. >> Motion to approve the conditions. Second. >> All right.
>> Okay. We have a uh application for a special permit to raise and rebuild the existing garage and replace it with a new garage with a one-bedroom ADU on the second floor. Also involved is removal of the patio and deck. Um and one
bedroom and replace it with a pvious uh paper patio or per Yeah. And um then the removal of one bedroom from the house for credit uh for the one bedroom added
to the ADU and the garage under section 240.2A for non-conforming structures. And this isn't the principal structure here is non-conforming alterations, reconstructions, changes to a single family dwelling or an accessory structure there too may be changed by
special permit from the ZBA provided the proposed structure which in this case is the uh garage with the ADU will not be substantially more detrimental to the neighborhood. And we so find for special permit considerations under section 2412.1E
we find that the site is adequate for the proposed use. the site is suitable for the proposed use. There's no uh uh evidence of impact negative impact on traffic flow and safety. There's no evidence of negative impact on neighborhood visual character views and vistas. There's adequate sewage
disposal. There's adequate utilities and this will not affect the supply of affordable housing. We had two letters in support and no comments. Do we need a finding as well? Just referencing the previous special permits
because there are interior that we should just >> we're amending to the extent necessary um previous special permits including one >> Mr. Clara will correct us here if we're wrong. Permit 110 of the year 98 or 88.
>> 88. >> It's um >> 88. >> It's 1108. >> All right. 110 88. 125 >> 125 2000 and 620 >> 2005 >> and that the modifications are per the plans being submitted and approved by
the board. >> All right. >> Thank you. >> Conditions as built >> per plans >> per plans all boards construction hours we probably end up
doing police up there. There's a decent amount of space in that in that driveway. >> Is there? Oh, okay. >> So, it's it's 26 ft and it's pretty wide. I think they'll probably be able to keep things on site, but to the extent necessary, yes, of course. >> What's the As coverage? No,
>> no one's worried. >> Yeah, lot. >> That's reasonable. That's very only That's reasonable. >> Yeah, I I'm the one that wrote it down. I don't >> No, it's very reasonable because of lock. >> Yeah. Um any other conditions?
>> We should also include the assessor to review the property so that they can confirm and correct the records that one bedroom has been removed from the main house and >> so that everything's properly assessed >> as well as if the accessory dwelling unit requires a separate address.
>> Uh engineering will >> uh provide the address. >> I think that was including engineering referral. >> Yeah. >> Must give us the line. And do we need no other structures, right? We don't >> fill that in. I guess >> kind of applied under per plan, but
>> yeah, per plan. >> Yeah. >> I think we're good. >> I think we're good. Anyway, >> you guys all set to vote? >> Run over your account, Tony. >> Did it run over your cat? >> Yes. >> All set to vote. >> All those in favor?
>> Opposed? None. >> Thank you very much. um if you'll allow me a brief moment to be saccharine. Um I won't be back before the board before the end of the year. Uh my job's okay. I don't always love it, but more days than not, it's good. But I enjoy this. I enjoy coming and representing clients in front of this board. I appreciate all
the time and effort you guys put into it. I really um value um the relationship that we have and I want to thank you for another year of letting me do this. So, thank you. >> No Christmas present. >> That is $50 limitation.
Can't get much anymore. >> Have a good holiday. >> Box of socks. >> Good holidays to everybody. >> Oh, thank you. >> Thank you very much. >> All right, moving on. We have minutes. Are we doing both? >> Dece. >> Just the fourth.
>> Yeah. >> I'll make a motion. Has everybody read the fourth? >> Yes. >> I'll make a motion to uh accept the minutes of December 4th. >> Second. >> I have a motion in the second. All those in favor? All right. >> All right. We'll do the
>> We'll do the other ones next year. >> Yay. >> Feels good. >> How freaky. We could say that. It's a time go. >> All right. So, then we have our request for an insubstantial change at 85 Brook K.
>> Good evening. >> Good evening. I'm Nick Marion. I'm here representing the owners of 85 Brick Kill LLC. Uh the modification to the comprehensive permit to allow two things. First, the
Department of Public Works on the advice of other departments changed the unit numbers on us after you issued the comprehensive permit. So, we need to modify the comprehensive permit to correct those unit numbers because
they also are reflected in the regulatory agreement and our all our affordable housing advertising. So, to keep everything where nobody's getting confused, we need to amend those numbers. Secondly,
well, let's deal with that, Bruce, if you'd like. Right. These these were the old unit numbers given by GPW. This he's afraid of confusion with building I.
So they changed the numbering. So there's no longer a building I. That building now becomes J. J becomes K. K becomes L. except after C.
>> You know, it's it sounds simple, but the comprehensive permit assigns unit numbers in yellow here to the uh to the affordable units. They now change based on what I requested in the application.
So, I ask you to work with me and change the comp permits to show that. The second thing we're looking for is >> Could you hold on one second? I guess procedurally should we vote on one separate item separately?
>> Separately, I think is >> Do you want to vote on the address change now? >> Yes, I would. I'll make a motion, Madam Chairman, uh that the board find the requested ad address change uh 85 Brick Hill Loan LLC permit 05824 and05824M
uh is insubstantial pursuant and as defined in 760 CMR 56.05 and it be approved. >> Second. >> We have a motion, a second on the address situation. That's it. All those in favor? >> I oppose? None.
>> Good memory, Jim. I I did forget to go to the public, but I don't think I go to the public for this. >> It's not It's not a full hearing, >> Mr. Okay, >> continue. >> Okay, sorry. >> Moving right along. We also had approved the board approved to settle the appeal
that we had a two a threec car garage with two overhead doors and one walking door that would show a floor plan that looked very similar to this. We're asking to We'll probably put this wall up
anyway because uh we're going to put tool room over here, but we're asking for while the guys are in there. >> What kind of room? >> Tool. Put tools. This is for equipment storage and appliances and water heaters. But the >> screens, >> the tools that we'll be using and when
we're going to be repairing leaf blowers and what have you to be a workbench. >> I have to ask, why is this coming back after the Wasari negotiation? Uh because we think it's a good idea to add the bathroom. >> Why didn't you bring it up in negotiation? Um >> don't know. It's we're bringing it up
now because we we think it's a good idea to bring it up and add a bathroom in there so that when we have workers working there. Number one, they have a bathroom to use and they're not we don't have to put a portage on there. They don't have to leave the site just to go to the bathroom. Secondly, we thought
it' make a good management office where people can come in and meet with management, sign leases, extensions to leases, drop off their rents, get questions answered, bring in their maintenance requests, and get them addressed sooner than they would if they had to mail them or email them or wait call us and wait for a call
back. >> Anybody here recall any other project where we've allowed this or where it's even been built? And then I have to go back to the first >> to the first presentation where you informed us that
this extra-l large garage was needed because you wanted to store all his equipment from his other projects there. >> And I I I think this is an abuse of the lot coverage. We're we're in the business of permitting affordable housing. We're not in the business of
permitting affordable offices for you to maintain your other developments on this location. And I think that's exactly what's going on. And you're not going to change my mind. >> You may not change your mind. At least to keep it open for a minute because we did ask for a fivecar garage. I agreed in the settlement.
>> Ask for a 26 car garage. You told us in the beginning what you intended to do with it, and I don't think your intentions have changed one bit. And again, you're you're getting extra lot coverage. You get all this to build affordable housing. You're asking us to
permit you an affordable office. And and I I and and you know damn well it's going to serve all your other properties, too. >> I'm asking you to make it make a concession and make this easier for the tenants. And we didn't ask for it last time. You're right. That's why we're here looking for an insubstantial
change. If we asked for it last time, I wouldn't be here. >> Nobody's ever asked during the negotiations. I wanted to drop balls a new idea question old idea. >> Hold on. Jim has a question >> through through you, Madam Chairman. I guess to Mr. Duffy is that
>> if this starts getting used as a commercial office space for properties not related is that going to be considered or would do you consider that now a commercial use of the space >> that would be subject to enforcement because it's not part it's not part of this particular development. Correct. I think there's a good argument that could
be made that it would be the case. >> Yes. >> Um I was prepared, by the way, to to offer a motion that this be determined to be a substantial change and you come back for a hearing. And that's all we can do tonight. We can either say yes or you come back for a hearing. >> And if we say nothing, then it's automatically approved.
>> It's automatically approved. So we can't do nothing. >> I'll second that motion. >> So I I'll make the motion that we determine that this request is a substantial change. one, it's not mentioned in 760 CMR 56.074D as an insubstantial change and also the
chair can so find that this matter should have been originally presented to the board at the hearing or during mediation. >> I'll second the motion. >> Yeah, unless it was already done. I'm sorry I did. >> Yeah, I great idea. >> So, we have a um
>> no more. >> Excuse me. >> Am I still allowed to talk? >> Sure. >> Yeah. All right. We have a motion. >> We have a motion and a second on the floor. >> Yeah. >> Uh >> you can save it for the hearing. >> Yeah. Uh all those in favor? >> I oppose? None.
>> I silence the house. >> Do you have a date? >> Say something. >> It's over. It's over. >> Uh January 8th. >> Oh, January 8th. >> January 8th. >> Yeah. If I decid to challenge ruining
January 8th, >> uh we are not going to have time to get a notice out for January 8th. >> Oh, some I didn't want to come January 8th either. >> The Feb 5 days. We could add them on to the 29th, but you may need um a consent for the time
because our pri our previous meetings there's not going to be time to get the legal ads out to people >> for January >> for the 8th or the 15th. >> So 29 then Yeah.
Is that okay? 29. January 29th. >> I think we have to vote on that. That's just when it's will be put on the agenda. >> Okay. >> Thank you.
>> All right. Moving on. Three. discussion on possible vote on creating a negotiating subcommittee to coordinate with councils on 40bs >> and other litigation. So, Madam Chairman, I I don't know, and I would encourage just perhaps a little
consensus having not had real time to digest the uh memo that was submitted from town council. Uh I wouldn't be prepared to act on a on any sort of motion tonight about forming a subcommittee. I would just ask that we might want to I know
that there's a lot of passion about this and that it's an important issue to the board, but I would like to make sure that we have I'm making an informed decision on this before I delegate. >> I think that's entirely reasonable. >> I too had no chance to read it only. >> So, we'll just put it on January 8th.
>> No. When >> I don't I'm >> next meeting. >> I'm I'm recused on the Wednesdays. So, right now I don't have to come to that meeting. and Mr. >> I I will be well also recused on that.
So he's not a comment either. >> So it's the meeting after that. Okay. >> 15. >> Is that okay with everybody? >> Yeah. >> I I I guess before we move on in just reading the conclusion, I'm still a little confused of how town
council got to the conclusion and I'm not sure how we ask her to review her conclusion or not. How how does that pro how would that process take place? Norine, >> could she just >> She'll have more time to review it. I
guess this came out at 4:30 today. >> Yeah, I guess it was confusing to me. >> Yeah, I guess what I recommend is that if any individual board members have a question that they call town council. >> No, that's not a good idea. That's not a good idea. >> I mean, I don't know how she's going to further explain what she wrote. uh we
can relay it through you and it >> send me an email and I can forward it to her. >> Essentially, we haven't dealt with this yet. So, she can resubmit something if she feels it needs to be corrected. >> Clarify the apparent inconsistencies between the last paragraph that begins
with the word lastly and the conclusion, >> right? >> On the line, >> the last paragraph doesn't line up, right? >> And she has plenty of time. and and and I'd like to know also to cite she's citing 3A section 18 which really does
not prohibit us from doing this. Um at least I don't believe from reading it. Um and I don't understand I'd like to have some clarification on how section 18 of 38 prohibits us from doing this. Also does the charter of this town
prohibit us from doing it? Does anything in the bylaw prohibit us from doing it? In fact, the um the 40B uh handbook of March of 2017 actually encourages this sort of thing.
Um so I'm confused because this is only citing MGL 38 section 18 and there are many aspects involved here. >> Well, if there's a provision in general laws that applies, it wipes out anything in the bylaw, >> right?
>> There is. Then there's confusion. I'm concerned because there's confusion. There is a handbook put out by math housing that actually allows this sort of thing. There is nothing that I can find. I'm not majority >> that allows that that says we can't do this.
>> Oh, maybe we could invite her to the meeting on the 15th. >> Yeah. >> Open the agenda and she could perhaps answer questions. I >> I think if you get all your emails into her or to through Norine, maybe answers will come back and she won't have to.
>> Yeah, maybe we'll know by then. It won't be necessary. >> I prefer the email process and >> yeah, more time to digest prior to walking in and try and do this in real time from at least my perspective. >> Just no last minute thing. I I I No more
last minute. Yeah, we got it at 4:30 and we're here at >> I would have gone through the I would have gone through the uh the regulation try to compare it and to make my point to the board. >> Yeah. >> If I had had time. >> All right. So, everybody get their emails in to Norine.
>> Emails in and we'll do it on the 15th. >> All right. With everybody. >> Yep. >> Sure. >> No vote on that. >> Board discussion. >> Anybody? >> No. Oo, board updates. Oo,
zoning administrator updates. >> Uh, so I guess the only thing I can think of to add for the board is that um, as you are probably aware, the building department is using software called Perodize for their permitting. And it's anticipated that as of the top
of January, the zoning board will also be accepting applications um through permit eyes as well. >> Good luck. >> Is that Is that better? >> Hope it goes okay. >> Is that better for you guys or >> I
>> I guess it'll be interesting. Yeah. I I mean I think >> it's going to be a challenge because we have a lot of applicants that come through the zoning board one time only. >> Yeah. Um, and if they're not represented, it might be a challenge for them to
figure out how to do this electronically. So, >> if you've ever had to use permanent eyes, it's going to be a lot of trouble. >> Really? >> Yeah. >> I guess >> good luck to you. >> I I didn't look at the schedule going forward. So, are you are we meeting the
8th, the 15th, and the 22nd right out of the blocks every week? Oh, okay. >> Yes. Yes, we're off the 22nd and we're booked for the 29th. >> Thank you. >> Now, is there going to be some kind of a
note there that uh instructs the public if they have difficulty, they can still come to you guys? You know, we're anticipating that we're still going to get foot traffic and that likely, >> you know, people who are represented
will have people who know who will be able to uh fill out applications through permitiz. >> But I I for one um I like to see the public trying to do their own thing, but I also uh understand that it's it's
sometimes a heavy lift for them. And uh you know I I think the help should be there for them cuz we certainly try or at least I do. >> You could even get more foot traffic actually >> at the beginning. >> Yeah. Ashley does all the work anyway.
>> I should say I'm really looking to forward to 2026 now. >> Oh boy. >> Is that it? >> All right. So >> might win mega box in which case >> Yeah. Yeah. world changes. >> We'll have to tell >> future agenda items.
>> Seeing none, >> seeing none. >> Our next meeting is next year. >> Yay. >> On January 8th at 6 p.m. >> Motion to adjourn, Madam Chair. >> Second. >> We have a motion to adjourn in a second. All those in favor?